{"title":"人工耳蜗植入与部分耳聋--处理器编程回顾。","authors":"Karin Hallin, Ulrika Larsson, Elsa Erixon","doi":"10.1080/00016489.2024.2387129","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To decide what programming parameters to use for cochlear implants (CIs) in partial deaf patients can be challenging.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The processor programming form, categorised as electrical complement (EC), electro-acoustic-stimulation (EAS) or electric stimulation (ES), and difficulties switching programming form were investigated.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective investigation of medical records and audiograms was conducted in adult patients intended for EC and EAS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-four ears (80 patients) were included. Twenty ears were initially fitted with EC, 32 with EAS, 30 with ES and 2 with both EC and EAS. Sixty-four ears met the criteria to use EC or EAS at initial fitting, however only 54 ears were fitted with EC or EAS initially. Twenty-eight patients altered between at least two programming forms and six of those experienced difficulties to adapt to a new form when their low-frequency hearing deteriorated. Twenty-five percent of patients initially fitted with EC or EAS switched programming form within two years.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Further studies on how to choose the most beneficial sound processor programming parameters for EC and EAS, and when to change between programming forms, are warranted as well as clear guidance on choosing the right candidates for EC and EAS.</p>","PeriodicalId":6880,"journal":{"name":"Acta Oto-Laryngologica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cochlear implantation and partial deafness - A retrospective review on processor programming.\",\"authors\":\"Karin Hallin, Ulrika Larsson, Elsa Erixon\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00016489.2024.2387129\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To decide what programming parameters to use for cochlear implants (CIs) in partial deaf patients can be challenging.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The processor programming form, categorised as electrical complement (EC), electro-acoustic-stimulation (EAS) or electric stimulation (ES), and difficulties switching programming form were investigated.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective investigation of medical records and audiograms was conducted in adult patients intended for EC and EAS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-four ears (80 patients) were included. Twenty ears were initially fitted with EC, 32 with EAS, 30 with ES and 2 with both EC and EAS. Sixty-four ears met the criteria to use EC or EAS at initial fitting, however only 54 ears were fitted with EC or EAS initially. Twenty-eight patients altered between at least two programming forms and six of those experienced difficulties to adapt to a new form when their low-frequency hearing deteriorated. Twenty-five percent of patients initially fitted with EC or EAS switched programming form within two years.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Further studies on how to choose the most beneficial sound processor programming parameters for EC and EAS, and when to change between programming forms, are warranted as well as clear guidance on choosing the right candidates for EC and EAS.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":6880,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Oto-Laryngologica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Oto-Laryngologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00016489.2024.2387129\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Oto-Laryngologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00016489.2024.2387129","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Cochlear implantation and partial deafness - A retrospective review on processor programming.
Background: To decide what programming parameters to use for cochlear implants (CIs) in partial deaf patients can be challenging.
Objective: The processor programming form, categorised as electrical complement (EC), electro-acoustic-stimulation (EAS) or electric stimulation (ES), and difficulties switching programming form were investigated.
Methods: A retrospective investigation of medical records and audiograms was conducted in adult patients intended for EC and EAS.
Results: Eighty-four ears (80 patients) were included. Twenty ears were initially fitted with EC, 32 with EAS, 30 with ES and 2 with both EC and EAS. Sixty-four ears met the criteria to use EC or EAS at initial fitting, however only 54 ears were fitted with EC or EAS initially. Twenty-eight patients altered between at least two programming forms and six of those experienced difficulties to adapt to a new form when their low-frequency hearing deteriorated. Twenty-five percent of patients initially fitted with EC or EAS switched programming form within two years.
Discussion: Further studies on how to choose the most beneficial sound processor programming parameters for EC and EAS, and when to change between programming forms, are warranted as well as clear guidance on choosing the right candidates for EC and EAS.
期刊介绍:
Acta Oto-Laryngologica is a truly international journal for translational otolaryngology and head- and neck surgery. The journal presents cutting-edge papers on clinical practice, clinical research and basic sciences. Acta also bridges the gap between clinical and basic research.